We performed a comparison between Fidelis Elevate and Intercept X Endpoint based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Microsoft 365 Defender is a stable solution."
"Microsoft Defender XDR is scalable."
"We are connected to Microsoft and have every laptop enrolled. This acts as an endpoint. The tool helps me check security and compliance. I can also check what a device is doing."
"I like 365 Defender's advanced threat hunting. The dashboard is user-friendly with templates for site policies, etc. The most important use case is evaluating the risk links and applications."
"Microsoft Defender's most critical component is its CASB solution. It has many built-in policies that can improve your organization's cloud security posture. It's effective regardless of where your users are, which is critical because most users are working from home. It's cloud-based, so nothing is on-premise."
"Having a single pane of glass for all Microsoft security services makes everything much easier. A security analyst can go to a single portal and see everything in one view. The integration of everything into one portal is a huge benefit."
"I like Defender XDR's automation capabilities. XDR isn't automated by default, but you can automate it to respond. If an attack is performed anywhere within the organization, you can isolate that instance from the network. This is what I can figure out for it. When integrated with Sentinel, you can set up playbooks to automate all the alerts gathered on Sentinel from different Microsoft solutions. Sentinel has a wider range of capabilities than XDR."
"It's a great threat intelligence source for us, providing alerts for things it detects on the network and on the machines. We've used it often when there is a potential incident to see what was done on a computer. That works quite nicely because you can see everything that the user has done..."
"It has a rating system now so you can rate things up or down, depending on your environment. This means alerting can be customized, yet still pick up anomalies."
"After rack and stack, devices were up and running base configurations within two hours. As with any IPS, tuning is required to stop false positives. This is no different, but the ease of use of the interface allowed my team to start making adjustments within a few hours."
"What I like the most about this solution is the complexity. It covers a lot of areas, unlike other solutions."
"The initial setup is very straightforward. The deployment of the server doesn't take so long; about a day or two max."
"Compared to similar solutions, it's quite scalable. You just need to add more storage to scale-up."
"Reporting is great, it is easy to do a quick search through 45 days of data for something of interest."
"It has also improved our hunt ability with quick search tools, to zone in on malware or other anomalies. It is able to link items to incidents from other consoles, and works natively with the SIEM."
"There are many valuable features. The NDR gives very good network visibility, and the endpoint module has a great feature called "Live Connect" for remote connections. They also have "Tasks" that can be run on endpoints to gather specific information or retrieve logs."
"The most valuable feature is that it literally works. We have reduced a lot of complaints after switching to Sophos."
"Intercept X helps with internal alerts, application access, and triggering support teams."
"We find the app control and its threat protection to be the best features."
"The most valuable features are the range and restriction."
"It is not just a simple virus scanning product. It handles more advanced needs."
"It is a very scalable solution."
"The most valuable features are the anti-ransomware engine, deep learning, web filtering, and the cloud manageability."
"It is quite scalable. You can always add more users. I would rate the scalability a nine out of ten."
"I personally have not seen much evidence of how Defender can enhance the story of zero trust for enterprises."
"Defender also lacks automated detection and response. You need to resolve issues manually. You can manage multiple Microsoft security products from a single portal, and all your security recommendations are in one place. It's easy to understand and manage. However, I wouldn't say Defender is a single pane of glass. You still need to switch between all of the available Microsoft tools. You can see all the alerts in one panel, but you can't automate remediation."
"In the beginning, it's difficult to navigate the system because it is quite large. Just trying to find your way and understand how the system works can be hard. After spending quite a lot of time searching it's a lot easier, but I wish it were a bit more user-friendly when you're trying to find things."
"Because of the training model, Defender XDR's automatic response sometimes blocks legitimate users and activities. Also, the UI sometimes responds slowly."
"From an integration standpoint, it is always improving overall. With Security Copilot coming out, as partners, we are waiting for the GDAP support so that we can actually see Security Copilot on behalf of customers if they subscribe to it."
"For some scenarios, it provides good visibility into threats, and for some scenarios, it doesn't. For example, sometimes the URLs within the emails have destinations, and you do get a screenshot and all further details, but it's not always the case. It would be good if they did a better job of enabling that for all the emails that they identified as malicious. When you get an email threat, you can go into the email and see more details, but the URL destination feature doesn't always show you a screenshot of the URL in that email. It also doesn't always give you the characteristics relating to that URL. It would be quite good if the information is complete where it says that we identified this URL, and this is what it looks like. There should be some threat intel about it. It should give you more details."
"There is no common area where we can manage all the policies for the EDR, third-party solutions, devices, servers, Windows, Mac, etc., but it's on the road map, and we ware waiting for that feature."
"The data recovery and backup could be improved."
"Configuration, in terms of building the collector and communicating with endpoints, is complex."
"I encounter difficulty removing certain entries in behavior or alerts; likewise, I am unable to add specific calls."
"The interface bug needs to be squashed once and for all. This has been the predominant issue with an otherwise stellar product. It reboots itself unscheduled, about once a month, due to a memory buffer flaw in the interface."
"We position the solution as an antivirus, but this part of the solution needs improvement. They need to generally enhance the features that they have, rather than adding anything new."
"Fidelis Endpoint is an expensive product making it one of its shortcomings that needs improvement."
"There is room for improvement in email security. It's a security issue. If you're aiming for XDR, covering the entire threat landscape is crucial."
"The reports in the endpoint area of Elevate can be improved."
"The number one thing I would like is if their support could be a little faster and it would be a little easier to get a hold of support when you need them."
"To be a perfect product, the price would have to be a bit better."
"It should offer better security updates."
"There should be a report including a flowchart or diagram. It will be useful to evaluate the software’s effectiveness."
"The main real-time scanning takes most of the processing power of my notebook."
"Deployment on cloud needs to be carried out manually."
"There is room for improvement in terms of stability and updates."
"Intercept X Endpoint is a very heavy solution that consumes a lot of RAM and should be made lighter."
Fidelis Elevate is ranked 41st in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 7 reviews while Intercept X Endpoint is ranked 4th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 101 reviews. Fidelis Elevate is rated 8.4, while Intercept X Endpoint is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Fidelis Elevate writes "Advanced threat detection capabilities with comprehensive incident response features providing robust cybersecurity for organizations". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Intercept X Endpoint writes "A standard offering with good threat analysis but reduces machine performance". Fidelis Elevate is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, VMware Carbon Black Cloud, CrowdStrike Falcon and Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS), whereas Intercept X Endpoint is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business, SentinelOne Singularity Complete and Fortinet FortiClient. See our Fidelis Elevate vs. Intercept X Endpoint report.
See our list of best Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) vendors, best Managed Detection and Response (MDR) vendors, and best Extended Detection and Response (XDR) vendors.
We monitor all Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
